June 04, 2007

Saville Will Not Get To Truth

BB 06/04/07 Saville Will Not Get To 'Truth'IT 06/04/07 UUP Seeks Halt To Devolved PolicingIT 06/05/07 Paisley Jnr Raises Doubts On Policing TimetableIT 06/05/07 Paisley Lays Out His Vision & Promises EqualitySB 06/03/07 Where It All Went Wrong For Sinn FeinSB 06/03/07 Opin: Ahern Solid As A Rock With Cowen By His SideIT 06/05/07 Irish Man In US Hopes To Get Seanad Nomination

The inquiry into Bloody Sunday will not uncover the definitivetruth surrounding the killings, a former senior civil servant hassaid.

Irish Senator Maurice Hayes said the œ175m spent on the inquiryso far could have been put to better use.

His comments came at the Tip O'Neill Peace Lecture at theUniversity of Ulster's Magee campus in Londonderry.

He warned a fixation with past atrocities could threaten the workof the devolved policitical institutions.

"The general political will that the institutions should be madeto work (and) should be allowed to do so could easily befrustrated if we insist on picking at the sores of old wounds,raising old ghosts, revive old animosities and suspicions, andmost of all shattering the burgeoning trust which is aprerequisite for peaceful co-existence and co-operation, " hesaid.

Mr Hayes is an independent member of the Irish Republic's Senateand a former Northern Ireland Ombudsman.

His high-profile career has also included roles as a PermanentSecretary in Northern Ireland's Department of Health and SocialServices and on the Patten Commission on policing.

In January 1972 paratroopers opened fire during a civil rightsmarch in Derry, killing 14.

The Saville Inquiry was established in 1998 by Prime MinisterTony Blair after a campaign by families of those killed andinjured.

Its findings will not be published until at least the end of nextyear.

Mr Hayes warned against expecting too much from the tribunal.

He also suggested other outrages had a case for similar publicprobes.

"I do not believe that the Saville Inquiry will unearth theessential truth, the definitive account of the events on BloodySunday, which are so deeply incised on the psyche of this city,"he said.

"I can think of many better things to do for the families ofvictims and survivors for œ200m.

"And if Bloody Sunday, why not inquiries for every other atrocitybeginning at Abercorn and ending at Omagh?"

Controversial moves to devolve policing and justice powers toNorthern Ireland should not go ahead while the police areinvestigating the IRA's role in the Northern Bank robbery, theAssembly heard today.

Ulster Unionist David Burnside said there was no demand in thecommunity for a local minister in charge of the sensitiveportfolio.

An Assembly committee chaired by the DUP's Jeffrey Donaldson willconsider the political hot potato and report back to the fullchamber by February 29th.

Mr Burnside asked: "Why is this motion is being brought beforethe house at this early stage when there's no demand from thecommunity for the transfer of justice and policing and therestill is a criminal investigation into the Northern Bank robberycarried out by the republican movement Sinn Fein/IRA?"

Robbers escaped with stgœ26.5m during the raid in Belfast citycentre in December 2004. PSNI chief constable Sir Hugh Ordeblamed the IRA for the operation, in which masked men held afamily at their west Belfast home and forced the bank employee toopen the vaults.

The motion was passed without debate after Speaker William Haycut off Mr Burnside.

Mr Donaldson chairs the Assembly and Executive Review Committee,which will consider the matter.

His party colleague, Finance Minister Peter Robinson, has said itcould be "several political lifetimes" before there was thecommunity confidence to have policing and justice powers devolvedto Northern Ireland because of "the rate Sinn Fein are going".

He said it was essential Sinn Fein recognise the need to buildconfidence in the community.

The new powers, currently reserved by the Northern IrelandOffice, are a key demand of Sinn Fein and were planned for reviewas part of the St Andrews Agreement which paved the way for lastmonth's power-sharing.

The transfer of policing and justice powers to the NorthernAssembly could be delayed for several years, a senior DemocraticUnionist Party politician claimed yesterday.

Ian Paisley jnr said that, contrary to the St Andrews Agreementtarget of May next year, the transfer of policing and justicepowers to the Assembly could only happen in a "future Assembly" -which at the earliest would be in 2011.

Mr Paisley, a junior Minister in the North's new administration,made clear yesterday that the DUP would use its effectivepolitical veto in the Assembly to prevent any attempt to devolvepolicing and justice powers by May next year or at any other timeif the party did not believe there was sufficient publicconfidence to justify this transfer.

In the critical political negotiations of recent months, SinnFein made the transfer of these powers by May next year a keypriority for agreeing to devolution.

The British and Irish governments also stated in the St AndrewsAgreement of October last year they believed that sufficientcommunity confidence should be established by May 2008 to devolvethese powers.

However, at a conference in Belfast yesterday, "Criminal JusticeFacing Devolution", Mr Paisley said he did not believe thetransfer of policing and justice - effectively the creation of aNorthern Executive department of justice - was achievable in thelifetime of the current Assembly, which runs out in May 2011.

Mr Paisley said this summer's marching season would be asignificant test and a measuring scale of how much was beingachieved in creating public confidence. "If community confidencecan be built during these periods that were once high withtension then the prospects of devolving policing and justice sometime during the life of a future Assembly will be better thanthey are today," he said.

"As a person within the DUP keen to see these powers devolved, Iam realistic enough to know that devolving them prematurely andbefore we have built that community confidence would befoolhardy," said Mr Paisley.

When asked by The Irish Times, on the margins of the conference,was he categorically stating the devolution of these powers wouldnot happen by May next year, he replied, "I believe that,realistically, it will be for a future Assembly. It won't be forthis Assembly mandate . . . I made it fairly clear - I think Imade it explicitly clear - that it is for a future Assembly, andthere is no point in kidding around with that, that somehowthings could be done," said Mr Paisley.

However, Sinn Fein Assembly member Alex Maskey, who alsoaddressed the conference, said the parties were working to the"agreed timeframe" of St Andrews. "We are working in the contextthat transfer of power will happen next year," he said.

"It is up to the parties to work together and not to be makingsilly grandstand headline statements which really would set thething back. Our job as politicians is to create confidence withinthe public and within the communities and to agree the timeframe,agree the modality, and get the thing done," said Mr Maskey, whoalso serves on the policing board.

Asked could Mr Paisley's statement cause tensions in thepowersharing Executive and Assembly, Mr Maskey said he was not"that concerned" by the junior Minister's comments. Referring tolast week's controversy over Mr Paisley's comments that he was"pretty repulsed" by homosexuality, Mr Maskey said, "I don't knowwhether he wants to distract from one headline by creatinganother."

First Minister the Rev Ian Paisley referred to Martin Luther Kingin the Northern Assembly yesterday and spoke passionately abouthis dream where people in Northern Ireland could easily live andwork together regardless of their political, religious or ethnicbackgrounds.

Dr Paisley, when discussing an Alliance Party motion on the needfor a "shared future" in Northern Ireland, also implicitly gavean undertaking that he would promote equality for all groups,including gays and lesbians.

Dr Paisley did not specifically mention homosexuality or therecent Hot Press remarks of his son and junior Minister IanPaisley jnr, that he was "pretty repulsed" by homosexuality. Butit was clear to what he was referring when he "prefaced" hiscomments on a shared future with his comment that his office was"totally committed to promoting equality and human rights".

And he added, "The First Minister and Deputy First Minister arecompletely opposed to any form of discrimination or harassmentagainst any citizen. So are all in their offices and those underthem."

On the motion itself, Dr Paisley said there was no doubt that ashared society must be created. "Like another King, I have adream where children can play together, where people can worktogether and where families can live happily side by side,regardless of their community background, their ethnic backgroundor their religious beliefs."

Dr Paisley said that conflict and violence had left a profoundlegacy and "time was needed to mend relationships, to healwounds, to repair fractured communities".

"But let us be clear: intolerance, sectarianism and racism orviolence must have no place in this or any other society." TheFirst Minister said he sent his children to a mixed school.

"They brought their Roman Catholic mates home with them and myhadn't they all great appetites. I knew that to my cost. But Iwas happy to see them and I am glad today those people are stillfriends of mine even though I disagree with them in theirreligion and they with my religion, and although they disagreewith me politically and I disagree with them politically."

He added, "It is right that we get the people of our beautifulprovince living together, working together, enjoying oneanother's company and I trust that we will see more of this.

"I have lived in Northern Ireland 81 years. I have some littleexperience of the ordinary man of the street. The ordinary man ofthe street today, both nationalists and unionists, RomanCatholic, Protestant, or any other religion, there is all withinthem today a hope that something has changed, that we are goingto move forward to better times.

"We in this Assembly can be the persons that can lead thiscommunity to a community that will do this part of this islandproud, and I look forward to that."

There was only one question on the minds of Sinn Fein activistsacross Ireland last week - what went wrong?

The general election was supposed to be the breakthrough electionfor the party, which expected years of work cultivating its votein the Republic to pay off.

The restoration of the Assembly in the North on May 8 wasexpected to boost Sinn Fein and make the party at leastkingmakers in the next Dail, if not coalition partners.

For a party that has orchestrated electoral victories in theNorth and the Republic over the past decade, defeat and lossesweren't in the script.

But the party is now facing the reality that the vast majority ofthe electorate in the Republic has rejected it, even with thehistoric deal in the North completed.

In Belfast, the engine room of the party, Sinn Fein activistswere left scratching their heads. Electoral success in theRepublic is of such paramount importance to Sinn Fein's strategythat the results of the election cannot be ignored or glossedover.

And the importance of electoral success in the Republic cannot beoverstated. Entry to the Dail was what led to the split in SinnFein in the mid1980s, resulting in the creation of RepublicanSinn Fein.

Even then, in the midst of the violence in the North, Adams hadidentified gaining power - or at least real influence - in theRepublic as a key objective.

Since the 1990s, and certainly since 2002, when the party had itsfirst real taste of success in politics in the Republic, the ideaof Sinn Fein holding power north and south has been a lynchpin ofits strategy.

Difficult issues, especially policing in the North, were partlysold to the party on the basis that electoral success beckoned inthe Republic.

Some party activists complained last week that the policingdebate was rushed through earlier this year with the generalelection in mind.

Working solely within the Stormont Assembly has limitations forSinn Fein. The party wants to emphasise the notion that theAssembly operates in a wider all-Ireland context and there wouldbe no better way to do that than by being in power in theRepublic.

More importantly, Sinn Fein would have real power if it was ingovernment on both sides of the border. The party had hoped thatgood election results would allow it to push through itsproposals for speaking rights in the Dail for northernpoliticians, but that is now in cold storage.

As part of its strategy in the Republic, Sinn Fein hasconsciously portrayed itself as the 'can do' party and hastargeted certain groups - the young, the urban poor, themarginalised - with some success. But it has not been enough tomove the party beyond its current support base.

Undoubtedly one of the biggest problem areas for the party is itseconomic policies, which are at best confusing and, at worst,scaring off voters.

The party's willingness to ditch its corporation tax policy justweeks before the election suggested desperation.

Privately, Sinn Fein acknowledges that getting its economicpolicies in order is a key priority. Economic policies were nevercentral to Sinn Fein strategy and while the party is beginning toaddress its shortcomings, its commitment to left-wing policiesmeans it will always be vulnerable to accusations that it willdamage the Celtic Tiger.

The party's failure to attract any significant numbers oftransfer votes was a key factor in its failure to capture seats.Even in the North, Sinn Fein has found that attracting transfersfrom SDLP-inclined nationalists is still a real issue.

While Sinn Fein claims that the strong performance of Fianna Failand Fine Gael lessened its vote in the election, it has notexplained why floating voters did not give the party second orthird preferences in any real numbers. The lack of transfers wasa crucial factor in the failure of Mary Lou McDonald and PearseDoherty to win seats.

The public perception of Sinn Fein as a northern party with nounderstanding of issues in the Republic is widespread, and wasnot helped by party leader Gerry Adams' admission that he did notget around to dealing with certain issues in the Republic becauseof events in the North.

While Sinn Fein has won some recognition and praise for its workon the peace process, it has still to prove its credentials as aparty that understands the electorate in the Republic.

Nearly all of its best-known members are from the North, so thefailure of McDonald and Doherty - two fresh-faced southerners -was a blow, not just in terms of seats, but overall strategy.Sinn Fein must now try to achieve credibility on issues in theRepublic such as the economy, while still putting Irish unity atthe top of its agenda. It must do this as one, cohesive, all-Ireland party.

That won't be easy. Irish unity and partition are real, liveissues that affect almost all aspects of civil and politicalsociety in the North. For many in the Republic, however, Irishunity is an abstract notion, an aspiration rather than a realityof day-to-day life.

Sinn Fein has been sustained in the North by the appetite of asignificant section of the population to end the existence of thestate. But that is simply not the case in the Republic and theparty will have to recognise that reality.

There is no single reason why Sinn Fein's vote did notmaterialise, just lots of smaller ones, which need to beaddressed.

Some of those reasons are within the party's power to change -its economic policies, Adams' performance in live debates, thepublic perception that it is a single issue party.

Others are outside of the Sinn Fein leadership's control - thehostility of all the major parties to Sinn Fein being in power inthe Republic, the fact that for many, the republican leadershipis still 'beyond the pale', the fact that events such as theNorthern Bank robbery and the McCartney murder are stillroutinely used against the party.

How then will Sinn Fein seek to get its strategy back on track inthe Republic? Clues may be found in its strategy in the Northsince the early 1980s,when it entered local councils and gained areputation for hard-work and exposing widespread malpractices.

Until the late 1970s, Sinn Fein was a weak party that wassubservient to the IRA. But by building up local politicalnetworks and a reputation for on-the-ground work, the party had,by the 1990s, developed into probably the best organised, mostsophisticated political machine in the North.

To this end, Sinn Fein will focus on the 2009 local elections asan opportunity to significantly strengthen its party machine inthe Republic for the next general election. The Assembly willalso be used as a 'shop window' for Sinn Fein when the nextelections are called.

If all goes according to plan, the party will by then haveexperience of government, of delivering on issues other than thepeace process, and the North will quite possibly boast ahealthier economy. Sinn Fein will claim credit for any of thosesuccesses and hope that the experience will make it moreelectable.

All the while, the party will look to develop its policies in theRepublic, promote its candidates in the Republic and positionitself as a party in tune with issues in the Republic.

The challenge for Sinn Fein is to do that without abandoning itselectorate in the North or its emphasis on Irish unity.

Bertie Ahern gave an intriguing interview to RTE's Charlie Birdlast Sunday on the banks of the Royal Canal. It was intriguingbecause of two things that he said.

One was that the criterion he would apply to the formation of anew government would be stability. The other was that he wouldconsult Brian Cowen on government options, as he consulted him onalmost everything.

First, the stability issue. If Ahern were serious about stabilitybeing the primary requirement of government, the manoeuvring withthe Progressive Democrats and Independents over the last week hasbeen just a smokescreen.

With the support of the PDs, Fianna Fail would also need thesupport of four of the five Independents, Beverley Flynn, JackieHealy-Rae, Finian McGrath, Tony Gregory and Michael Lowry.

If Fine Gael is astute, it could nobble Lowry by inviting him torejoin the party, and there is good reason why it should do that.The proceedings of the Moriarty Tribunal now show that there isno evidence that Lowry delivered the second mobile phonefranchise to Denis O'Brien in return for bribes.

So on what basis can Lowry remain excluded from Fine Gael?Because he cheated on his taxes? How can that be a problem forFine Gael, when that party as a corporation did precisely thesame in making under-the-counter payments to staff and involvingitself in the pick-me-up scam?

Then there is the problem with Tony Gregory. He would not supporta government that persisted with co-location of private andpublic hospitals, nor would he go along with the continued use ofShannon by American troops on their way to and from Iraq. So, nogo there.

There shouldn't be much problem with Beverley Flynn - a nod toRTE to stop pursuing her for its legal costs and an invitation torejoin the party would suffice. A few more piers in south Kerryshould ensure the support of Jackie Healy-Rae.

T h at leaves Finian McGrath. A government reliant on McGrathwould not be stable. The independent TD has recently been takingrefuge in the cliche of politics being the art of the possible.Is this a prelude to abandoning his previous positions onhospital co-location and Shannon? If McGrath is prepared toabandon previously ''principled'' positions, then by the sametoken is he capable of reneging on any five-year arrangement -all the more so if, along the way, he discovers other''principles''?

Ahern might be tempted to take a chance on a government supportedby the PDs and four Independents, but that certainly would not bestable. So either Ahern was not serious about stability lastSunday, or the manoeuvrings with the PDs and Independents lastweek was definitely a smokescreen.

It isn't believable that he would opt for government with theGreens either, although he has given some indication that such adeal remains an option.

Even if the Greens could be persuaded to agree to government withFianna Fail - and that is doubtful - a party ruled by its membersrather than its parliamentary party, would be far too volatile.

The obvious partner is Labour - the only problem being that Ahernwould have to sacrifice five cabinet posts and five juniorministers - this would involve dropping three cabinet ministerscurrently in office - and Ahern hates taking tough decisions thatare unpopular with his party.

But then there would be no volatility with Labour. Pat Rabbittewould extricate himself from his repeated assurances that hewould not put Fianna Fail back in government with the usual guffabout the national interest.

The Labour conference would stamp on the predictable left-wingoutrage over ''sleeping with the enemy'' and would be oh-so-loyaland compliant.

But, more than that, a Fianna Fail/Labour government would bedevastating for Fine Gael. No hope of office in five years, areturn to government of Fianna Fail a certainty in 2012.

Back to that other Ahern comment on the banks of the Royal Canal,about Brian Cowen. Ahern rarely says anything withoutcalculation, even when what he is saying is unintelligible(perhaps especially when what he is saying is unintelligible).

Saying he would discuss options for government with Cowen andthat he discussed everything of importance with Cowen wascertainly calculated.

It might just have been a public acknowledgement of the supportCowen was to him in the election campaign, but it might also bean insurance strategy. If things get rough for him in governmentover the next while because of tribunal revelations, he will haveCowen on his side - and with Cowen on his side he would beinvulnerable internally in Fianna Fail. Without Cowen, he mightindeed be vulnerable.

For the going could get rough for Ahern in the next year or so ifthe tribunal continues its examination of his finances andquestions him about them in public.

There are very difficult issues for him and there might bepressures from a coalition partner or supporter for him to vacatethe Fianna Fail leadership and go.

He has also caused problems for himself by confirming that hewill go before the next election, as there could be demands forhim to go well in advance to leave his successor time to make his(or her) mark.

Ray O'Hanlon will know in July if he is to become the firstemigrant rights representative in the Seanad, writes Se nO'Driscollfrom New York

A Dublin journalist will know in the next month if he is tobecome the first emigrant rights representative in the Seanad.

New York-based Irish Echo journalist Ray O'Hanlon said he hadbeen having talks with both Fianna F il and Fine Gael and had hada very good response from Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny.

The aim is to secure the support of the two main parties for anagreed emigrant candidate.

O'Hanlon says he would eventually like to see a panel for two orthree emigrant representatives but does not want to rush thepolitical parties into sudden change.

Many emigrant campaigners in the United States, includingO'Hanlon, would like to see emigrants directly voting in Irishelections.

Samantha Morton, a barwoman in Yonkers, New York, says it is ashame that another Irish general election has gone by withoutforeign voting rights.

"I've been on a few of the Irish radio talk shows aboutemigration. I get the feeling we're an embarrassment in Ireland.

"The country's trying to look confident and assertive and theythink we're over in America showing the poor mouth," she says.

Nearly 20 years after a Bill allowing emigrants to vote wasnarrowly defeated in the D il, the desire for voter rights hasbeen raised again by US immigration rights lobbyists. Many wantto use their votes to reward Irish politicians who back USimmigration reform that would legalise more than 12 millionundocumented immigrants.

Much of the resistance to emigrant votes has come frompoliticians who fear protest votes, especially those going toSinn Fein.

Morton, originally from Palmerstown in Dublin, is a socialist andoccasional Sinn Fein supporter, but she admits that republicansentimentality gives emigrant voter rights a bad reputation.

"You meet old fellas who are ardent republicans. Some of them arereal cheesy idiots who play the Wolfe Tones and they haven't aclue. The voters from 10 bars in New York could be enough toswing an election. There's a lot of different dynamics at play."

It might be feasible to put a limit on the number of years avoter can be outside the country and still retain the right tovote, she says.

Fellow New York resident Tom Woodlock, originally from Tipperary,is a Sinn Fein supporter but he also recognises the complexpolitics among US emigrants.

Like Morton, he is annoyed by sentimentalists and is particularlydismayed by small groups of Northern republicans who chantpartisan slogans at meetings on immigration reform and who arenot calling for votes for Irish citizens.

"They're the type who think they have an in with the IRA orsomething and they probably ran for their lives to get overhere," he says.

Although he has great respect for Enda Kenny, who met USemigrants in March, Woodlock does not believe that emigrant votesare coming soon.

"There are so many politicians out there who will promise youeverything and do absolutely nothing," Woodlock adds.

"If we got the vote at home it would really help, but we don'tsee any political will for it."

For O'Hanlon, the internet has allowed emigrants to keep up withIrish politics and globalisation has greatly increased therelationship between Ireland and its citizens living abroad.

"There is no longer this sense of exile and distance. The statemay end at the Cliffs of Moher, but the economy doesn't,"O'Hanlon says.

"People are more aware and more than ever before. Now there hasto be a complementary political voice to match it."